System Center Configuration Manager Feedback

Ideas

What features would you like to see?

All of the feedback that you share in these forums will be monitored and reviewed by the Microsoft engineering teams responsible for building System Center Configuration Manager, though we can’t promise to reply to all posts.

Standard Disclaimer – our lawyers made us put this here ;-) Please note that the System Center Configuration Manager feedback site is moderated and is a voluntary participation-based project. Please do not send any novel or patentable ideas, copyrighted materials, samples or demos which you do not want to grant a license to Microsoft. See the “User Voice Terms of Service” link below for more information.

How can we improve Configuration Manager?

You've used all your votes and won't be able to post a new idea, but you can still search and comment on existing ideas.

There are two ways to get more votes:

When an admin closes an idea you've voted on, you'll get your votes back from that idea.

You can remove your votes from an open idea you support.

To see ideas you have already voted on, select the "My feedback" filter and select "My open ideas".

Tell us your idea

(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

we have 10 Task Sequences accross 10 countries, and 10 test task sequences that show up in the same list. It would be nice to be able to easily hide deployments that are only for testing, and not production. If at the beginning of a T.S. , user domain credentials could be entered, and that would determine T.S. availability. Or they could be greyed out if not to be run by that user.

1 - software update detections should be improve to analyze and detect missing/required updates
2- software updates installation should be install in sequence not on which deployment reaches first. should be a way to modified the install base on date and time.
3- a better scheduling for the deployment that will allow the updates to be install during a flexible time and another for the downloading of the patches
4- bring back the use of restart and update, or shutdown and update, this were very useful

I still feel that the old way is till better except for the reporting. I hope you look into this for future builds.

I feel that sccm/wsus requires a lot of improvements:

1 - software update detections should be improve to analyze and detect missing/required updates
2- software updates installation should be install in sequence not on which deployment reaches first. should be a way to modified the install base on date and time.
3- a better scheduling for the deployment that will allow the updates to be install during a flexible time and another for the downloading of the patches
4- bring back the use of restart and update, or shutdown and update, this were very useful

Application Model doesn't provide native Installation progress bar similar to Task Sequence progress bar so that we don't need to create custom progress bar interface this is will help user have better end user experience

I run a single Primary Site Server supporting 26K clients. I also have two Regional MP's (Not MP Replicas).

The stat.box and statemsg.box files regularly fill up with over 20K+ files (supporting only a few thousand clients each) and it takes nearly 10 hours for the MP to send all those files (one by one) to the Site Server over the WAN.

The bandwidth utilization is minimal (stat.box with 27K files is only about 7MB in size) however sending that many individual files over the WAN is extremely inefficient.

Compressing these files into a single zip/cab/etc. before sending to the Site Server would drastically reduce the overall time to copy them and they could easily be decompressed/despooled on the Site Server and processed into the database.

For an infrastructure my size, this would greatly improve efficiency of the MP without the need to host a SQL Replica.

I run a single Primary Site Server supporting 26K clients. I also have two Regional MP's (Not MP Replicas).

The stat.box and statemsg.box files regularly fill up with over 20K+ files (supporting only a few thousand clients each) and it takes nearly 10 hours for the MP to send all those files (one by one) to the Site Server over the WAN.

The bandwidth utilization is minimal (stat.box with 27K files is only about 7MB in size) however sending that many individual files over the WAN is extremely inefficient.

Compressing these files into a single zip/cab/etc. before sending to the…

In ConfigMgr 1511, the "All Windows 10 Updates" node has no filter bar as we have for Software Updates. There are lots of elements listed and the number will increase with the future Windows 10 Builds.
It could be very helpful to get a filter bar which allows to filter on languages, build, SKU, etc.

On the Computerinfo-Dialog the only field that is not copy/past-enabled is the MAC-Adress field. Its not a Big Problem but every time i need to use it its not realy nice to write the compleate mac-adress by hand.

The default window is too small to see the window pane contents properly. It always needs to be enlarged. Either make it larger as a default or allow the user to set the size and retain it across sessions.

When checking the Windows 10 Servicing dashboard you get the nice pretty rings. Why is it not possibly to click a ring and show all the devices that are currently on that build you are highlighted over? It's obviously already pulling the information, so why can't you just click the ring E.g the 1511 ring and it shows you the report of machines on that build.

With MS recommended that no more then 200 collections are set to incremental, I would like to see a report on \Assets and Compliance\ Overview\ page that shows how many collections you have, how many are full update, how many are incremental, and how many are manual.

Today for various E2E scenarios you install the required roles, set client agent settings, and ensure pre-reqs are all installed. I would prefer that I just select to enable a feature, SCCM scans my role servers, makes a suggestion of what needs to be installed where and various pre-reqs that are needed and give me the option to select just do it. At that point everything would get setup automatically in a way that is suggested as best practice by the SCCM product.

Sometimes when remediating non-compliant Compliance Items, other files may be required. In order to do this currently, it is necessary to create a collection that queries the compliance status of the compliance item, and then deploy a package to that collection. This adds a delay in processing, as it is now necessary for the collection to evaluate before deploying the package. Additionally, if the collection evaluation runs at a quicker schedule than compliance evaluation, the remediation package may run multiple times before compliance has been updated.

It would be helpful for compliance to have the ability to deploy a package immediately as part of the remediation, without the necessity of having to create a separate deployment collection first. Also, this should work for more than just Script Compliance Items. It should also work for things like File Compliance, etc.

Sometimes when remediating non-compliant Compliance Items, other files may be required. In order to do this currently, it is necessary to create a collection that queries the compliance status of the compliance item, and then deploy a package to that collection. This adds a delay in processing, as it is now necessary for the collection to evaluate before deploying the package. Additionally, if the collection evaluation runs at a quicker schedule than compliance evaluation, the remediation package may run multiple times before compliance has been updated.

It would be helpful for compliance to have the ability to deploy a package…

I have a customer that, besides the new features in the Software Center, needs to use the Company Portal to all the +6000 users. The question here is the lack of customization. They want to be able to customize:

1. The two pictures that appear in the Company Portal
2. The color Schema for the tiles in the main page of company portal
3. The Language of the App (that can be done changing the OS language).

They are making a great an d big investment in the new images to their users and are using a clean desktop with clean apps, and i can agree that the company Portal is more clean than the Software Center.

I have a customer that, besides the new features in the Software Center, needs to use the Company Portal to all the +6000 users. The question here is the lack of customization. They want to be able to customize:

1. The two pictures that appear in the Company Portal
2. The color Schema for the tiles in the main page of company portal
3. The Language of the App (that can be done changing the OS language).

They are making a great an d big investment in the new images to their users and are using a clean desktop with…

Today you can easily create a user collection based on AD Group where the collection has a direct membership for the group. However, this is not true for computers where you cannot add a group to a device collection.

This should be possible as many organizations also create group for computers and having to look for each membership causes a performance issue when you have many groups/group membership